The international group Human Rights Watch published a report last week titled "Shaking the Foundations: The Human Rights Implications of Killer Robots." As you might be able to guess from the title, those implications are not good.

The report was released just as a four-day "informal meeting" on "lethal autonomous weapons systems" (LAWS — not an appropriate acronym) was held by the Convention on Conventional Weapons (its actual name) at the United Nations outpost in Geneva. The meeting was part of a series of recent attempts to start the conversation about the use of LAWS before they're deployed, either as self-assigning drone aircraft or humanoid cyborgs that look like Arnold Schwarzenegger.

We all fear the impact of runaway technology, whether you're talking about the federal government monitoring digital communication or the cellphone that your child can't seem to put down. But sometimes, that anxiety verges into hysteria — and in an ironic twist, that flip into paranoia usually happens online.

In the same week that HRW's killer-robot report was released, a considerable amount of chatter on the Capitol Confidential blog — a little slice of Web heaven that I'm responsible for policing — concerned a proposal to allow the city of Albany to install red-light cameras at up to 20 intersections.

The cameras would automatically issue a $50 ticket to the owners of cars caught ignoring traffic signals. The citation wouldn't even result in points on your license. The pilot program, similar to those currently operational in urban zones from Long Island to Buffalo, would run through 2020.

For some bizarre reason, this eminently local law enforcement decision will require the approval of the state Legislature, where it was submitted a week ago as a bill backed in the Assembly by Patricia Fahy and John McDonald, and in the Senate by Neil Breslin. Albany Mayor Kathy Sheehan, like the lawmakers a Democrat, supports the measure as well.

Regular readers will note that I've tried to make Not Getting Hit By a Car an occasional theme of this column, and have inveighed against the perilous tendency of Albany drivers to treat yellow lights as an invitation to speed up, and stopping at red lights as more of a suggestion than a law. (I was T-boned 15 months ago by a pickup whose driver sailed through a traffic signal just a few blocks from my house.)

So count me among those who don't have a problem with red-light cameras at Albany's most perilous intersections, especially on Central, Washington, Madison and New Scotland avenues.

There are, however, contrary opinions. "Here we go throwing our rights out the window," read one blog comment typical of the voices of opposition. "This can and will be used against us in a court of law."

On the first point: What rights are we talking about here — the right to run a red light, or the right not to be observed while piloting a two-ton vehicle down a public thoroughfare? And on the second: Yes, it probably could be used against you in a court of law because that's what a civil society does with documentary evidence of wrongdoing.

For careless drivers, how is a red-light camera any different from a police car stationed at a problematic corner — outside of the fact that the camera won't require health care insurance and a pension? (Not yet, at least.)

A number of commenters were convinced that Sheehan was being duplicitous when she claimed the cameras would be a safety measure and not a mere cash generator for the city.

"Expect the time frame between changing from green to red to decrease when Albany needs added revenue," one wrote. That's a valid concern — Florida officials have been accused of squeezing the duration of yellow lights to drive up violations — but one that's secondary to the question of whether to install the cameras.

Amid the often foggy analysis, there would break through the occasional ray of common sense.

Such as: "Stop signs are traffic control devices. So are center lines. Shall we do away with them, then?"

It's enough to renew your faith in humanity, which for good and/or ill comes up with these technological innovations in the first place.